Marshall v. Munro

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that neutral principles can be applied to adjudicate defamation claims alleging that defendant-pastor said that plaintiff-fellow pastor was divorced, was dishonest, was unable to preach due to throat surgery, and had made improper advances upon church member
• finding First Amendment does not bar claims that do not require determination of whether plaintiff was qualified to be a pastor
• finding First Amendment does not bar claims that do not require determination of whether plaintiff was qualified to be a pastor
• jurisdiction existed because resolution of claims did not involve examination of church’s determination of pastor’s qualifications
• court had subject matter jurisdiction over the defamation and interference with contract claims in a dispute between a pastor (who had not been hired
• defamation claim by pastor against another church official allowed where the allegedly defamatory statements did not require court to examine qualifications required of pastors

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).